ARTICLES
DECEMBER 2004 ARTICLES
Contents © 2004
by Jim Holman.
All rights reserved.
They're Just Malicious -- And Ridiculous, Too!
Bishop Steinbock Won't Give Public Response
BY ROBERT KUMPEL
Parishioners of St. Patrick's church in Merced continue to express frustration over how Fresno's bishop John Steinbock has handled the case of Father Jean Lastiri. Last August it was discovered that Lastiri, St. Patrick 's pastor, was engaging in internet homosexual porn and apparent solicitation for genital favors. Saying Lastiri's behavior was "inappropriate," Bishop Steinbock removed Lastiri as pastor and said the priest would undergo therapy for his "compulsion." In a September 9 letter to the Merced parish, however, Steinbock announced that instead of undergoing therapy, Lastiri would take a leave of absence.
One sign of parishioners' dissatisfaction is a new website, fresnodiocesewatch.com, that has been created to document the laity's problems with the bishop. Then on September 8, and October 6, a parishioner, Jose Ovalle, sent a letter to the apostolic nuncio with copies forwarded to the prefect for the Congregation for Bishops in Rome, complaining about Bishop Steinbock's inaction toward Father Lastiri. The letter included a copy of the September Mission story, "Baca and the Bear," and other documents about the problem of homosexual priests in Fresno diocese.
The apostolic nuncio forwarded copies of the letter to Bishop Steinbock, who, in turn, wrote back to Ovalle on October 20. In his letter, Steinbock accuses the Mission of "maliciousness" and calls the story on Lastiri "ridiculous." Steinbock goes on to make ten points to refute Ovalle's complaints, including the following statements:
"I repeat Fr. Lastiri's website was very inappropriate."
"It is totally false that I removed a priest from ministry only after he had molested six girls. The sexual abuse that was alleged of the priest supposedly took place some eight to fifteen years before I had come to the Diocese of Santa Rosa. I removed him from ministry for actions that occurred many years before I was in the Diocese."
"It is totally false that I proceeded to get the priest a job in the Diocese of San Francisco. In no way did I petition the Archbishop of San Francisco to give him any ministry." (The previous two points are documented in a March 21, 2002 San Francisco Chronicle article which can be read at www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article/cgi?file=chronicle/archive/2002/03/21/MN18208 0.DTL)
"Fr. Lastiri never lived with a man in Visalia. They lived in two separate towns." (A detective's report documents the search of the room of convicted pedophile Joe Banuelos, who resided at Holy Family Church, Visalia in 1991 at the same time Fr. Lastiri was pastor there).
"I have stated publicly that what is important of any priest, whether he has a heterosexual or homosexual orientation, is that he is living a celibate life style, faithful to the Lord Jesus and the teaching of the church, and then indeed he can be a good priest. This is not against the Magisterium of the Church."
I made several attempts to contact Bishop Steinbock to ask him to clarify the above points. Diocesan communications director William Lucido did not return e-mail requests for an interview. When contacted by phone in October, Lucido said that he was no longer working as communications director and refused to disclose who the new director was. "The new director of communications is preparing a reply for your request, and he'll be getting to that, probably today or tomorrow," Lucido said. More research revealed the new communications director to be Deacon Jesse Avila. The following questions were emailed to Avila on November 5: 1) Bishop Steinbock writes, "I repeat, Fr. Lastiri's website is very inappropriate." Why does the bishop speak of what Lastiri did as "inappropriate" and not "sinful"? 2) As to the statements about the priest dismissed in Santa Rosa, does the bishop mean to say that the account given in the San Francisco Chronicle on March 21, 2002 was inaccurate? 3) His Excellency says in point 5 that "Father Lastiri never lived with a man in Visalia. They lived in two separate towns." Does he deny the accuracy of the detective's report presented to him by Thomas Walsh on October 3, 2003, which speaks of the search of convicted pedophile Banuelos' residence at the parish? 4) As to the bishop's last point, how can it be irrelevant whether a priest is a homosexual? Is not the "orientation" an objective disorder?
Deacon Avila was reached by phone on November 9 and promised to answer the questions by e-mail within 24 hours. The next day, he sent the following reply to the questions in an e-mail marked, "low priority":
"1. Relative to the referenced March 21, 2002, San Francisco Chronicle article concerning Bishop's court testimony, the Bishop's testimony is a matter of public record. It was transcribed by a court reporter. The court transcript is the best source for confirming the Bishop's testimony. The article is one reporter's perspective on the testimony and other court proceedings."
"2. Relative to Bishop's letter of October 20, 2004, addressed to Mr. Jose F. Ovalle, Bishop's letter speaks for itself. Bishop's letter accurately and factually responds to the points that Mr. Ovalle addressed to the Apostolic Nuncio, which was the purpose of the letter."
"3. You also attached Bishop's September 9, 2004, letter to the community in St. Patrick's parish. The information related in the letter is accurate and current as and when written and the comments and points in it are self-explanatory."
"Finally, your questions touch upon personnel matters, medical matters, and the personal and private matters of clergy and private individuals. As Bishop stated in his October 20 letter to Mr. Ovalle, he will not comment on such matters, due to the requirements of state and federal privacy laws."
Ovalle, meanwhile, isn't very hopeful about things improving in the diocese any time soon. "When I wrote the apostolic nuncio," said Ovalle, "I told him, this is sinful and it's wrong. And for the bishop just to use the word 'inappropriate' ... the Catechism is much stronger in its language about homosexuality."